政府會發牌給維基的電視公司嗎？我看機會愈來愈渺茫。
完全撇開政治因素，只單從經濟數字來說，可持續發展的機會有幾多？
大家如果年多兩年前在媒體看過我的分析，就知道放煙花容易，長期照明十分困難。
有立場的傳媒大亨可以大力捧你，令不明營運的人去Like及藉地盤去論點。但講還講，營運是要錢的，幾好的概念，幾漂亮的口號和傳媒吹捧，幾多Like，但廣告及贊助都追不上營運成本，甚麼也是徒然。
或許年青一輩仍未明白，無理想固然同咸魚無分別，但有理想而不切實際的收場可能慘過被食掉的咸魚。
任何生意，就算如何有創意或有強大傳媒後盾支撐，都要有好的營運模式和持續性。任何讀過EMBA或MCOM的朋友去看這間電視公司的營運方式，相信都會得出類似的結論，而政府的審批牌照，看著這些數字，你估佢哋會點諗？
You are absolutely correct. By supporting a lot (as much as possible)
One can ascertain that one will achieve some kind of relative response depending on how co incidental the responsive data is to the attention. If the optimal supportive motivation is relative to the foundation (wether valid or not) a supportive return will follow.
Accuracy is the issue. This is an hypothetical deduction (not quite as comprehensive as educational requirements are about here in North America) but by any of the individuals motive intelligence. Linguistics and vocabulary play the most important part of communication. Gaps of data in verbal communication only provide confusion.
To express anything at all one must work untill one can say what one means in its entirety otherwise one will express a peer groups distrust and desire to avoid the issue. The bottom line is to study practical, basic, fundemental, primary, ground level technicalities of domestic level to know for sure one is known for sure and this aspect goes far and beyond the experience of the
marriage relationship which is considered by most the most complete education for the poor. From your good friend Bruce K. Paxton
